Also how will maps work in Canada and other parts of the world ? I doubt they will change it there,
Maybe someone from Google is around and can explain better.
I am mad at Google for a lot of things, but this is not one of them. A map should represent the current reality. Google Maps defaults to the user’s local reality, which seems reasonable to me.
I worked at a mapping company and we had similar setups for contested borders. You would get the map that your government accepts. It was not the company’s prerogative to weigh in on those issues.
Remember that if Google Maps has to weigh in on obvious nonsense, it will also need to weigh in on far trickier issues, and at their scale, it might affect the outcome. This sort of legal neutrality seems like a better line of conduct to me.
I argue that using 'rules' against an entity that knows no rules is futile. Everyone pretends that things are going swimmingly and that the rules-based world order is alive and well, that if we just use enough rules and never make difficult choices that go against them, the threat will eventually go away. This is partially what allowed it to happen in the first place. As it stands now, obeying these orders isn't neutrality, it's enabling.
Would it be based on popular usage? The procedure by which it changed? Maybe we distinguish between bicameralism and presentment, an executive order, and the discretion of a bureaucrat. Or do we normally take the government database at its word but treat this as a sui generis "this guy is being an asshole" exception?
Not trying to interrogate you specifically. I am pondering these questions myself. I don't like that the name changed but I'm hard pressed to think of a good neutral policy that doesn't also sweep up a bunch of (far stickier) renaming situations around the world.
For instance, I checked Nepal area and Google Maps already shows the area as flood affected. It didnt take years.
Does it though? It’s showing the new name in every country except Canada. They could have limited this rename to USA only, but they didn’t.
For us it still says Lake Ontario :-)
Not sure what Trump is looking forward to win with all these moves?
He just floods the media and everyone’s minds with a constant stream of junk.
Some is consequential, some is not. Either way, the stream is so continuous it is distracting from the actual important things he’s covering up (raping kids, creating his own extremely well funded gestapo, kidnapping presidents, murdering fishermen, fucking up a war he started, stealing the election, etc)
In general, I don't like that the world defaults to the Silicon Valley version of reality.
Many of these are telcos that use "Buy Canadian" patriotism to get governments to protect them from international competitors. It should be scandalous if they're getting all their web front-end services from US companies. I know Google is the big name in maps, so that may be unavoidable and hard to shift, but if it's also the middle web-hosting providers... that's a lot less excusable for companies that love to wrap themselves in the Maple Leaf.
I wish Google and others weren't telling the emperor how regal his clothes look but it seems reasonable to remain synced with the USGS.
So...thanks, Google, I guess?
Bonus: when something is fucky, I can actually generally get it fixed, unlike google which continues to report an 80kph speed limit in various residential streets and school zones in my city.
If Trump renamed the state of NY to New Trumpland, would Google and Apple go along with it? Seems like they would. It's just embarrassing.
Canadian-American border cuts the lake so dual name is obvious as Canada doesn’t have any intention to rename it.
Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America) is the same situation. USA is the only country who changed the name so…
The other situation could be with cities or counties that are inside US territory.
Or take an example with Dept of War. Nobody abroad isn’t using Dept of Defense in their texts of anymore… (Btw Dept of War was since 1789 til 1949 then renamed to Dept of Defense.)
Different situation is with X. As the X is confusing for a lot of people, Twitter is added after slash to explain the situation (X/Twitter).
In Canada I'm seeing simply "Lake Ontario" still.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Does anybody believe that this would happen today?
2015: "Do the right thing"
2026: "Just press down a little harder on the neck there please, that'll do thank you."
The name change isn’t the problem. The problem is that it was even possible in the first place by just the whim of one person.
Blindly relying on GNIS is silly, particularly when that dependency is forced on users.
(Also, what fucking law exempts GNIS edits from the APA? Can a Democrat President just rename everything in every red state to random strings?)
A Democrat president must do this to teach the Republican strategists, representatives and voters consequences of actions. Then they will be ready for 'sensible compromise, reform and limits on executive power'.
Remember how this guy couldn't get a loan in 2016? How he was hundreds of RICO millions in debt to foreign banks and couldn't get a loan? Now we all need to waste money for their gold-plated vanity needs.
I heard that the US is now the 14th Canadian Province, South and True. We need to practice our politeness, learn to have gravy on our fries, and get ready to give up our guns, for the good of the people, eh.
On the plus side, Tim Hortons, here we come!
...
... seven second pause ...
...
Now that's what I'm talking about
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_Names_Information_S...
Though the US Gov renamed many places in 1962 (Kennedy), and again in 1974 (Nixon/Ford), they conspicuously left more than a few of them extant, as mentioned in the above article.
Don't equate real things with fake issues trump pretends are real. Lake of america is political propaganda. It's not real.
The real solution here is for Google to decide on their values. What they think is right, why they think that, and who they back because of it. Only that would help them distinguish between genuine conflicts and a temper tantrum, both domestically and internationally.
Of course, doing this would be extremely controversial and as a corporation they would never go for it anyway. What it would do is show their position to the world openly and let people judge them on that merit and decide if they really want to work with them. Applying universal rules that 'accidentally' happen to help a certain side is just as much of a political and ideological choice as what I've suggested above, it's just a lot more wishy-washy and coated in a pretense of rationality.
All these big tech capitulations are their bets that the rule of law will not protect them, but kissing the ring will
It's a bad bet, ultimately - b/c the benefits and protections of kissing the ring are a mirage - their weakness is an invitation
If you're suggesting a rogue government with the ability to deprive such independent organizations of funding as a means of control, you're not wrong. If the government and people united have enough of a majority (or enough lack of accountability), laws are as valuable as the paper it's printed on. Leaving the latter aside, it's also just models from the federal constitution that (nearly?) all state constitutions tend to be living documents. Nothing is truly set in stone and most mechanisms tend to have overridde mechanics with a majority or supermajority.
I’m not advocating for counterbattery partisanship per se. But if demonstration is literally what it takes to get this to stop (or escalate to a point where everyone agrees it’s a crisis), so be it. At the very least, someone should be promising this to primary voters to get the conversation going.
If anything, it strikes me more as a flood the zone tactic, not that the dems need help with distraction - They were obsessing over some stupid reflecting pool while Jan 6 pardon expansions were taking place.
Remember when Mitch filibustered Obama's SC nomination because presidents are lame ducks in their final year in office?
Great work continuing to deny rights unequally according to medical status!
He launched https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfire_Hurricane_(FBI_inves..., "but the evidence available to investigators did not establish that the Trump campaign had 'conspired or coordinated' with the Russian government".
>Remember when Mitch filibustered Obama's SC nomination because presidents are lame ducks in their final year in office?
It wasn't a filibuster, McConnell didn't bring it to a vote at all. But I do remember the episode, and I'm mad about it. The Democrats must propose and relentlessly campaign on supreme court reform. Have the longest-serving justice replaced every Presidential term, and change the rules so if the President proposes a candidate, they MUST be voted on.
>Great work continuing to deny rights unequally according to medical status!
I don't know what you mean by this.
I'm also not quite sure how your comment in general is responsive to the assertion that Trump felonies should have been investigated and prosecuted faster, before he was reelected. They had 4 years under Biden, it should have been possible.
If it were me, agency commissioners elected by popular vote to a six year term, subject to recall by vote and impeachment by Congress. But that's orthogonal to the purpose of the branch.
The people must become the 4th branch of the government to balance the three when they unify in corruption.